The main reason I don't like the idea of 1v1, 2v2, 3v3 is that it reinforces the feeling that the WCC is just a meaningless friendly. By adding two COMPLETELY meaningless games to it, how is it meant to be taken MORE seriously? It is not a step in the right direction at all. It will do more harm than good IMO.

On top of this, it isn't even going to be a regular occurance. It's just an appalling strategy.

For those questioning the format (and thinking there's a possibility it wouldn't include the champions), I'm guessing when they mean 1v1, 2v2, 3v3 they mean after the play-off series, and not the league standings. So Leeds would be 1st (champions), Warrington 2nd (GF runners up) and Wigan 3rd (highest placed semi finalists). Coincidentally, that would be the SL Champs, the CC winners and the LLS winners.

Don't understand the assumption that the Aussies would hammer us. Wire, Leeds, Wigan and maybe Saints and Hull would be able to compete against NRL sides.

In 1997, the far weaker side of the Super League Wars in Australia competed in the World Club Challenge.The Super League Rebel Clubs gave it their best shot.They made a good fist of it though but it had little interest or support in the pro ARL League community in Australia.

Its a wase of time in an already congested season in both Leagues.With the end of quality players moving to English Clubs and the NRL Clubs cherry picking the best English players does anyone think it will get MORE competitive than it was thenLook at the scores, it was mass thrashings in many cases.

The main reason I don't like the idea of 1v1, 2v2, 3v3 is that it reinforces the feeling that the WCC is just a meaningless friendly. By adding two COMPLETELY meaningless games to it, how is it meant to be taken MORE seriously? It is not a step in the right direction at all. It will do more harm than good IMO.

On top of this, it isn't even going to be a regular occurance. It's just an appalling strategy.

For those questioning the format (and thinking there's a possibility it wouldn't include the champions), I'm guessing when they mean 1v1, 2v2, 3v3 they mean after the play-off series, and not the league standings. So Leeds would be 1st (champions), Warrington 2nd (GF runners up) and Wigan 3rd (highest placed semi finalists). Coincidentally, that would be the SL Champs, the CC winners and the LLS winners.

I don't see how it dilutes the WCC match itself - that will still be between the champions of each league. As the game is envisaged to be played in February in the following year I frankly don't get how the question of the SL champions not being involved even arises? If you're really determined to be negative and assume the two other matches will be pointless, fair enough. Personally I don't understand what's not to like about getting the chance to see the best NRL teams play over here and it just winds me up how some so called fans here aren't happy unless they're running down people like Hetherington who are trying to build something.Give it a chance.

You would be better off building up the Test Games where it would at least be competitive.You have National teams playing and Media attention if it is competitive, Clubs like Warrington and Hull will have little pulling power in Australia with the media or Fans.

Would it be better to have a 3 Test series between England and Australia or...

Leeds V StormWarrington V DogsWigan V Souths

If the Australian Clubs put out a full side and its Apples and Apples and whipped the English Clubs in Australia what then?Will they get better next year?It will have the Legs of the Exiles concept.

I don't see how it dilutes the WCC match itself - that will still be between the champions of each league. As the game is envisaged to be played in February in the following year I frankly don't get how the question of the SL champions not being involved even arises? If you're really determined to be negative and assume the two other matches will be pointless, fair enough. Personally I don't understand what's not to like about getting the chance to see the best NRL teams play over here and it just winds me up how some so called fans here aren't happy unless they're running down people like Hetherington who are trying to build something.Give it a chance.

What would it be if it was diluted anymore than it currently is?Whats less than water? if you live in Brisbane you would know the WCC gets very little coverage and barely a mention in a League mad City like Brisbane.They play the game on TV at 1 am or something two days after its played on channel Nine.

I don't see how it dilutes the WCC match itself - that will still be between the champions of each league.

The match is already seen by many as just an exhibition (I don't see it that way). By attaching two ACTUAL exhibition games to it, it makes it appear more like an exhibition.

Sometimes less is more.

As the game is envisaged to be played in February in the following year I frankly don't get how the question of the SL champions not being involved even arises?

Because some people have perceived 1v1, 2v2, 3v3 to mean league positions. Leeds finishing 5th wouldn't qualify if that was the case.It obviously isn't the case, but it needs clarifying for those that can't work it out.

If you're really determined to be negative and assume the two other matches will be pointless, fair enough.

It's not being negative, they literally are pointless. They are friendlies. You don't win anything. No league points. No qualification. No trophy. No prize money has been mentioned.

Personally I don't understand what's not to like about getting the chance to see the best NRL teams play over here and it just winds me up how some so called fans here aren't happy unless they're running down people like Hetherington who are trying to build something.Give it a chance.

If it's a pointless game, it won't be the best teams. It'll be some pretty good teams going through the motions in a nothing game. It's a shocking format that will generate very little interest from both sides of the world.If the games had some actual meaning, then it would be FANTASTIC news. But they don't.

Only 5 times and I think they were deprived of competing a few times as the WCC was not held some years as its that flaky sort of game like the honour of the the Golden Boot recently where there is no rhyme or reason.

The leeds chairman or owner, not sure what he is appears to try and punch beyond his weight.
I do not think Leeds and what they want carries much weight with NRL heavyweights to be honest.
He says plenty about the WCC and has for years, how much has happened? when sales people do that people stop listening to them, its Spin at best and more likely ######.

I take your points Wellsy. I'm just prepared to give Hetherington the benefit of the doubt - I have to assume he's taken into account all your reservations.
The concept of a "test series" of 3 club matches is, it has to be said, a bit left field and this biennial aspect is only "experimental". Apparently.
I just hang onto to the very good news that NRL clubs are at last taking it more seriously and that the stand alone WCC fixture is returning downunder.

I take your points Wellsy. I'm just prepared to give Hetherington the benefit of the doubt - I have to assume he's taken into account all your reservations.The concept of a "test series" of 3 club matches is, it has to be said, a bit left field and this biennial aspect is only "experimental". Apparently.I just hang onto to the very good news that NRL clubs are at last taking it more seriously and that the stand alone WCC fixture is returning downunder.

I just don't understand how this idea has come up though. It's not expanding the WCC at all. It's still one game between 2 teams. It's completely unnecessary and by the look of people's opinions unwanted. It just looks set up to fail.

The competition needs expanding to more than one game between more than two teams.

What would it be if it was diluted anymore than it currently is?Whats less than water? if you live in Brisbane you would know the WCC gets very little coverage and barely a mention in a League mad City like Brisbane.They play the game on TV at 1 am or something two days after its played on channel Nine.

The point that the only time it was played in Brisbane 52,000 turned out at the old ANZ to see Wigan win. No interest? Doubt it myself look at how Lang park fills for games which would probably get 12,000 in the NRL-centric Sydney. What does the modern Lang park hold 50k+? My guess is 50k+ would turn out.

Continuing to fly the RL flag and introduce more and more folk to the greatest game in North Lincs

I just don't understand how this idea has come up though. It's not expanding the WCC at all. It's still one game between 2 teams. It's completely unnecessary and by the look of people's opinions unwanted. It just looks set up to fail.

The competition needs expanding to more than one game between more than two teams.

Other than a suggested format last year, why are you assuming that the 1v1 2v2 3v3 is the format chosen?